An injunction cannot be issued against a non-party to the proceedings, affirming the necessity of proper impleading for enforceability.

VIJU ABRAHAM, J.

.................................................................

O.P(C) No.1429 of 2024 .................................................................

Dated this the 29^th day of August, 2024

JUDGMENT

The above original petition is filed by third parties to the proceedings pending as O.S. No.212 of 2024 on the file of Munsiff Court, Thallessery being aggrieved by Ext.P6 order dated 25.06.2024 in I.A. No.1 of 2024 in O.S. No.212 of 2024 on the file of the Munsiff Court, Thallasery. The 1^st respondent is the plaintiff in the suit which was filed seeking a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction and other reliefs. It is averred in the plaint as follows:

“3.3. The sum and substance of the plaint allegations is that the defendants No.1 to 10 are the owners of the plaint A schedule properties and the defendant No.11 (R12 herein) is the tenant as per a registered lease deed No.403/2019 of S.R.O. Thalassery. The tenure of the lease is from 1-3-2019 to 31-1- 2029. The defendant No. 11 constructed the plaint B schedule building and started a restaurant therein. The plaintiff was admitted to the partnership on 26-2-2021 along with defendants No.15 and 16 and the plaintiff was designated as the Joint Managing Director of the Defendant No. 11. The plaint C schedule movables are kept in the schedule B building. Subsequently, due to the crude activities of the defendants the plaintiff was forced to close the business and several times he approached the defendants to get the lease agreement in his name as they assured, but none of them showed any interest towards his attempt. On 14/05/2024, the defendant No.1 to 10 arranged goondas and illegally trespassed to the plaint B schedule property by broke open the lock of and started to demolish the plaint B schedule property thereafter the plaintiff approached the police authority and filed compliant against the defendants but it did not yield any result. The plaintiff approached the trial court on the apprehension that the defendants would demolish the entire plaint B schedule property and it will cause irreparable loss and damage to the plaintiff who was invested his entire life savings into the above said business. A true copy of the plaint in O.S No.212 of 2024 on the file of the Munsiff’s Court, Thalassery is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit P1.”

2. Along with the suit I.A. No. 1 of 2024 was filed seeking temporary injunction. A detailed objection was filed by the defendants mainly contending that the firm was in arrears of rent and defendants 1 to 10 filed suit as C.S. No. 8 of 2023 before the Commercial Court, Thallasery for the realisation of the same and pending the suit, the firm surrendered the entire land, building and everything therein to defendants 1 to 10 as per registered release deed No.1267 of 2023 dated 07.09.2023 of SRO Thallasery and the building was thereafter leased out to the petitioners herein as per lease deed dated 17.04.2024 for conducting hotel business and they are in occupation of the plaint B schedule building as tenants and doing interior decoration work. The said contention is discernable from Exts.P3 and P4 counter statements filed to I.A. No.1 of 2024. After hearing the parties, interim injunction was granted as per Ext.P6. Thereafter, the plaintiff filed I.A. No.11